I feel sorry for the DA or assistant DA that apparently got murdered pursuing this case 9 years ago. Proud for him too. There were so many Catholics that did wrong. I hope he was one that did right. I am sorry that evil took his life.

What price could a man pay to equal the many injuries he's caused? None in this world.

One man who could not control his appetites crushed untold numbers of young men, their families, those who donated to his charity, and Penn State. The ripples are wide, all from believing that 'the heart wants what it wants'.

The evil of surrendering to one's desires. Woody Allen's son knows what this means.

If he were truly a "monster" at least a few of the victims who testified would have long since met with unfortunate accidents. How many young men now leading productive lives will come forward at sentencing to say they were abused at home or would have been if not for the intervention provided by Sandusky's charity?

It's easy to forget that Horatio Alger moved to New York and took up writing pulp novels about teenaged street boys after he left school teaching and the Unitarian ministry behind due to accusations of pedophilia. He started writing his pulps during the Civil War when the streets were flooded with children orphaned by the war.

Sandusky's charity appears to peddle a modern variation on the Horatio Alger myth.

You know what will freak you out about Facebook? Finding that the guy who molested you as a kid is among the friends of your friends, and after nearly forgetting about him for decades, seeing his name and face pop up on your screen.

Maybe I am just an unenlightened hillbilly but All the good deeds this guy did does not negate nor ameliorate, the harm he inflicted on his first victim, let alone his last ones.

He will fry in the hell he deserves.

As for Penn State, they can just stop. They were told. They covered for this guy. Penn State should be disolved, it's assets broken up, and all of them given to a new charity, to help the boys this animal preyed upon with their blessings. Because he won football games. Loathsome.

Was the success that Coach Sandusky enjoyed during his long career, motivated by knowing that if he was rich and had powerful friends and many supporters that he would then be in a better position to groom and hunt his victims?

If he was not 'Jerry Sandusky of Penn State' would he just be another dirty pervert in the bushes of the local park?

Would we be talking about it now?

Was this case given more attention because of the high profile of the defendant?

An awful lot of people here went well beyond the concept of benefit of the doubt (and remember, we're not talking about the obligation of an empaneled jury, after all). Not just well beyond that, but way beyond that--while, also, kicking into dust the notion of common sense. I get it, I really do, that all of this was a while ago, and so many may just have forgotten.

That said, I found the reactions then, in real time, to be unforgettable--and so, to this day, in current real time, I haven't forgotten them. I remember. And, yes, I think there a number here who should, too: Remember, and reflect.

More to the point at hand, Palladian, will people--regardless of their axes to grind or their institutions to shield or their notions to protect or their groups to defend or their inclinations to triumph--simply just step the hell up and loudly say that some things are just flat out wrong, loudly call out wrong-doers most especially among their own, and, above all, loudly defend true victims, especially the youngest among us (no matter how complicated that might be, given the truly odious, but NOT on point, "for the children" meme that does require push-back against)?

I'm asking, because I think therein lies the critical point of confrontation, and the juncture of what people should be asking themselves and what they should asking of others.

Religion-hater? My dear friend, don't simplify things. I merely ask questions, as a teacher and a seeker of knowledge. I am interested to hear theology deployed intelligently and sincerely, to try to help explain the unexplainable miseries and accidents of life.

Why did no one, temporal or metaphysical, answer the cries and anguish of the victims?

We've mocked Him, cursed Him, kicked Him out of every institution this country has .... and then wonder where He is? He his waiting for us as a country to repent.

If one believes He knew you when you were in the womb (and I do), is it any wonder the US is going down the tubes after destroying 40 million babies.

There is no mystery here. The US is achieving second rate status at an accelerating rate. The final nail will be when the US abandons Israel. (I will bless them that bless thee and curse them that curse thee). Is it pure coincidence that our country has flourished from Israel's inception and now it looks rather bleak?

Palladian said-"Why did no one, temporal or metaphysical, answer the cries and anguish of the victims?"

Well since you have returned to the dimensions of the temporal plane, I think we can say that JS was so very skilled at getting what he wanted. And it seems was enabled and empowered along the way by those who should have known better.

But if we want to play the blame game you must agree that all responsibility lies with JS and JS alone.

Others can deal with their own actions- but these crimes had a single source.

Palladian said... PS Love the religion-haters coming out of the woodwork on this one.

Religion-hater? My dear friend, don't simplify things. I merely ask questions, as a teacher and a seeker of knowledge. I am interested to hear theology deployed intelligently and sincerely, to try to help explain the unexplainable miseries and accidents of life

Shit happens?I don't think the old man in the sky works that way. You can't demand he come down and save your ass or the plight of the innocent. The best we can do is rest comfortably in the knowledge that He handed us this mess and tried to give us the tools to deal with it. That, and god had a very good sense of humor.Our original sin wasn't lust but deciet. Which makes Sandusky pure evil.

"Hes going to get the protection not afforded those kids he ***ed with."

You say this like it's a bad thing.

No matter what an offender has done, we are (vestigially) a nation of laws, and persons convicted of crimes should be subject to punishment mandated at court of law. Our system of justice is not--or should not be--an instrument of brute revenge, and it is appalling and inexcusable that we allow convicts, whether young or old, nonviolent or violent, to be victimized--essentially tortured--in our custody, subject to rape, beatings, or murder.

you said "No matter what an offender has done, we are (vestigially) a nation of laws, and persons convicted of crimes should be subject to punishment mandated at court of law. Our system of justice is not--or should not be--an instrument of brute revenge, and it is appalling and inexcusable that we allow convicts, whether young or old, nonviolent or violent, to be victimized--essentially tortured--in our custody, subject to rape, beatings, or murderunless they rape children.

Fixed it for ya bud.(how anyone can excuse a baby rapist is beyond me. If he get's anally raped every day for 100 years it won't balance the scales of justice. The "man" is a monster)

I am not a believer, though I was raised as one, but I can't understand why so many think their belief in a God presupposes He will--or should--intervene directly into our affairs to whatever purpose--to help football teams win games, to help nations win wars, to protect the innocent from harm. This reveals how essentially childish and selfish is nature of the belief held by so many.

God, however defined, is not to be seen as a cosmic do-gooder and protector; He should be understood as the underlying source of existence, our knowledge of (or faith in) which provides us with strength to continue in the face of adversity and solace in the aftermath of tragedy.

In the end, whether our lives are marked by travail or unending good fortune, we all will die. Our lives are brief, and, granting for discussion that (a) God and an afterlife exists, our lives on this plane must be viewed as but a larval period preceding that which will follow. From this perspective, whatever happens to us in this life must be seen as insignificant, warranting no attention.

All is vanity.

Of course, to those who dismiss the existence of a God or an afterlife, life's miseries and injustices are significant, and we know that it is up to us to make the best life for ourselves and our fellows as we can, as this is all we get!

If we are a nation of law, we must let the law dictate the punishment for crime. To allow any person in prison, no matter his crime, to be subjected to torture and rape by other inmates or by prison staff is barbarous.

Not only should this shock the conscience, we should fear the consequences for selfish reasons. Who of us can know that we or our loved ones may not end up in jail or prison, and that we or our loved ones--even if incarcerated for nonviolent offenses, or briefly--will not be subject to such torture?

As Thomas Paine said, and this holds true in so many contexts:

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

No matter what an offender has done, we are (vestigially) a nation of laws, and persons convicted of crimes should be subject to punishment mandated at court of law. Our system of justice is not--or should not be--an instrument of brute revenge, and it is appalling and inexcusable that we allow convicts, whether young or old, nonviolent or violent, to be victimized--essentially tortured--in our custody, subject to rape, beatings, or murder.

Good heavens, I'm in complete agreement with Robert Cook! Obviously the end of the world is nigh.

If Mrs. Sandusky knew and did nothing she should be in prison as well. As well as everyone else who knew or suspected and did nothing.

This trial encompasses so many topics we've discussed here - ethics, gays, denial, religion, beliefs, child abuse, brainwashing, public protection of the guilty, and more - I'm amazed anything happened to the clown at all. But to see anyone make this statement - which could've come right from my mouth and has on numerous occasions - really floors me.

Palladian, I think, asks not only a good question but the question. It's a good question, but it's not a unique question. Indeed, I'd say the whole Old Testament and New Testament are framed around this question. Which is curious, as the most important critique of the faith is also the foundational question in the faith's own writings.

Where was the savior in the midst of all of this?

On the other side of his question is the damned free-will issue.

Well, I do agree with the other responses, but that still just leaves us in a bind.

All too often, too, it leaves us preaching a savior that pretty much only saves us from existential angst and guilt. Is that all we're left with?

I don't think so. We see Jesus taking up the cause of the sick, the brokenhearted, the cast off and left behinds.

There is fundamentally something wrong with churches that look the other way when people abuse, and it's something wrong with the Jesus they claim to serve.

Where was the savior? I honestly don't know. But, from what it sounds like there were many, many people who could have intervened, but didn't. Sandunsky has a damned free-will for the choices he made and all those others, the passive enablers also have a damned free-will. They made choices. And at this point, we're affected by people's choices.

Where was the savior? Sandunsky was convicted and stopped. We see what he did as a crime. We see his manipulation as an evil. Not all societies do. The system failed here, but our system really is oriented around trying to protect children rather than abusing or discarding them. Even the cast off children of bad parents, the ones no one wants, they are valuable to our society too. The system didn't work here. But, people knew there was wrong, the courts stamp this judgement that it is wrong.

Where is the savior? This is a different kind of question. A belief in a savior acknowledges that bad things happen but goes onto argue that such bad things are not ultimate reality or determinative. I have hope for the victims that they may find a new life, one not defined by their victimization but by new expressions of living that serve to help others--truly help. They can rise out of their experiences to resonate life rather than death to others. I have hope in that.

I also have hope in a savior for which Sandusky is not the final word, nor any Sandusky. Some people want to rape reality, but they won't win. And Sandusky and others involved are facing judgment, not just from the courts, but for life itself.

Where was the savior? Damned free will led people to make choices they felt would satisfy their more immediate goals. Sandusky indulged his evil, others indulged their silence and looked away, so as not to rock the boat. If they were Christian, they defied their savior in these actions.

My hope, is that such actions do not need to happen again, that people can be people who care for the orphans and the left out, rather than abuse them, can be people who stand up against people of power for the sake of those without power. That is the savior that displayed himself and the savior who calls us to be his witnesses in faith and action here.

Religion-hater? My dear friend, don't simplify things. I merely ask questions, as a teacher and a seeker of knowledge. I am interested to hear theology deployed intelligently and sincerely, to try to help explain the unexplainable miseries and accidents of life.

Why did no one, temporal or metaphysical, answer the cries and anguish of the victims?

I believe they just did.

God gives us intellect and free will. What we do with those things determines, in this case, whether people are on the side of good or evil.

Carnifex, why are you trying to excel all others in your outrage? Sure, give the guilty parties whatever they deserve. But Penn State is an extremely valuable educational institution and talking of dissolving it for "charity," for the sake of feeding the poor or whatever, that's just plain holier-than-thouness.

The more people wax wroth the less I take this seriously. And no, I think Joe Pa dying disgraced of heartbreak is more than enough punishment for whatever it is you imagine he did.

What would be interesting and potentially valuable, even redemptive to a small extent, would be for Sandusky, now that it's over, to absolutely come clean and open up as to all activities, his motivations, origins, etc. Like the interviews with serial killers, it would show.us.a.side of humanity we obviously don't often see or understand. Maybe that would help kids avoid his like in future, or to detect and foil or capture such predators in future.

I'm not a victim of abuse, never once. I just hold that any person that deliberatly harms a child sacrifices any claim to being a human being. A child is the ultimate innocent. They're innocence will be destroyed soon enough by the world. More the worse for them and us.

As far as Penn State goes, Joe Pa was told, the chancellor was told, and I'm sure other people knew otherwise how explain the missing DA from 9 years ago. All so they could watch a football team win. Fuck them. I hope all those raped children were worth it. If the place burned down it would be a crime 'cause all those cockroaches would scatter to the winds. If it burned down with all the guilty parties n it though...then you'd have something.

I remember decades ago, watching a news report. The FBI was bringing this child molester in through the air port. The father was there with a gun. No more need for a trial. The best part was that we didn't have any pansies wringing their hands over the poor, poor criminal. No the best part was they didn't charge the guy with anything, because he did the right thing. You put down rabid animals. You don't re-habilitate,re-educate, re-form, these guys. You simply dispose of them, and then there is no recidivism.

Not trying to be an ass, just the way I think about child molesters.

This crap with Zimmerman..it's the same thing. George Zimmerman should get a parade from the evidence we've seen. Do you think the DA is gonna' spring some Matlock type of reveal during the trial? Trayvon Marten got what he deserved by all accounts, except for the whiny little babies who worry that we weren't fair to him.

Same for any priests who engage in that avtivity. I'm sure God will know if they're truly repentant. I can't read minds or souls though. So, while I wouyldn't have Sandusky, or ant criminal executed/murdered by the state, neithyer would I go out of my way to shield them from the punishment they merit. How fitting for them to be executed by the very thugs they try to hide inside themselves.

POGO said...What price could a man pay to equal the many injuries he's caused? None in this world.

One man who could not control his appetites crushed untold numbers of young men, their families, those who donated to his charity, and Penn State. The ripples are wide, all from believing that 'the heart wants what it wants'.

The evil of surrendering to one's desires..

Well put.

1) I have also found it a little disengenuos(sp) that the homesexual aspect of this is never mentioned.

2) Years back when Tucker Carlson had his PBS show he had on a Havard professor who stated that pedophiles need to be viewed the same as alcoholics, that they were born with these desires and should not be considered criminals but instead needed to be accepted by society. Yeah, really.

"I have also found it a little disengenuos(sp) that the homesexual aspect of this is never mentioned."

Maybe because it is implicit, given that all Sandusky's victims were boys.

Or do you suggest that Sandusky's pederasty was a result of his being homosexual? Do you mean to repeat the canard that child molesters tend to be homosexual and homosexuals tend to be child molestors?

Given the utter absence of any data to support this idea, it is no mystery that there was no mention of the "homosexual aspect of this."

CrackIf I'm wrong about Mormons and about Ronmey I'll change my avatar. I previously thought that you were a nut, but given what you believe you have no choice but to do the things you are doing. I have no reason to believe you, and every reason to believe what I believe. I'm not ignoring or excusing evil. When we get to that big courtroom you're talking about if I find out I am being complicit with evil I'll go where ever co-conspirators go and that will be justice.

! every reason to believe what I believe. I'm not ignoring or excusing evil. When we get to that big courtroom you're talking about if I find out I am being complicit with evil I'll go where ever co-conspirators go and that will be justice.

As a new reader of this blog (and therefore, new commenter), please allow me to jump right in and attempt to answer your questions to the floor:

Was the success that Coach Sandusky enjoyed during his long career, motivated by knowing that if he was rich and had powerful friends and many supporters that he would then be in a better position to groom and hunt his victims?

Without a doubt, because that's what these guys do. They place themselves in positions of power, authority and social standing for the very purpose of being in the best possible position to hunt and groom their victims. It is why they become cops, teachers, coaches, priests, pop-culture stars, politicians and parental figures; it is why they prop themselves up under the guise of moral and altruistic concern for their young marks. Trust + proximity = their playgrounds.

If he was not 'Jerry Sandusky of Penn State' would he just be another dirty pervert in the bushes of the local park?

Predators like Sandusky not only hope that most people still believe guys like them are the exception to the 'dirty perverts in the bushes of the local park' rather than the rule, they count on it.

Would we be talking about it now?

Probably not...but we are. One can only hope that as the media exposure dies down and Sandusky begins to rot in prison, we are still talking about it.

Was this case given more attention because of the high profile of the defendant?

Of course it was - and because of the high profile of his enablers. But again, one can only hope that it serves as a litmus to education about and future action against less high profile but equally dangerous predators still operating out there.

Did Mr Sandusky receive equal justice under the law?

Given that he's not already six feet under at the hands of the mob who'd love to get a hold of him, I'd say absolutely.

I pray Jesus come and help heal the souls of those boys.

I pray to Jesus that people never forget those boys, and never ignore the doubtless thousands of others who are currently, or will be, victims of their own Sanduskys. I pray that Jesus help people learn everything they can about these wolves-in-sheep's clothing, so that they can better recognize them when they SEE their rather predictable and classic behavioral patterns. I pray to Jesus that when anyone has any question at all spring up from the back of their mind about someone, no matter who that person is, that rather than dismiss it, they LISTEN to it and have the courage to follow up. I pray to Jesus that whenever anyone HEARS from someone else (whether it be a witness or victim themselves) about abuse going on, they believe the person and have the courage to follow up. I pray to Jesus that if anyone ever becomes a eyewitness, that they use the recent case of the father in Texas who walked in on a man abusing his daughter (yes, abuse still happens to girls, too) as the CORRECT example of what to do.I pray that Sandusky's survivors can live the full, rich lives they deserve to live.

CrackI'm going to go right on believing what I believe, and defending it when necessary. I hope you do the same. I'm not convinced by your proofs or your profanity. But, I admire your honesty and I think on many issues we agree. Nothing gets done without people believing and acting on their beliefs. If their's a price to pay later OK. I'm willing to pay it.

Crack I'm going to go right on believing what I believe, and defending it when necessary. I hope you do the same. I'm not convinced by your proofs or your profanity. But, I admire your honesty and I think on many issues we agree. Nothing gets done without people believing and acting on their beliefs. If their's a price to pay later OK. I'm willing to pay it.

So, let me see if I've got this right:

You're "not convinced by your proofs" but you don't say, or provide any evidence, they're wrong. Your "beliefs" are better. Is that how it works? Maturity, I mean?

Also, you don't like my profanity (which I'm quite proud of) but you're defending a "church" that has used "scathing and often personal attacks" to defend itself from simple questions about it's origins - only to finally stop, now, because potty mouths, like me, are currently on their case:

As this "Mormon moment" continues to ratchet up public scrutiny of the LDS Church, Mormon apologists are assessing the best way to shield the faith: Play offense or stick to defense?Last week, the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship at Brigham Young University fired Daniel Peterson, who served as editor of the Mormon Studies Review since its founding 23 years ago.

Peterson,a recognized expert on Islamic and Arabic studies and a weekly columnist for the LDS Church-owned Deseret News, remains employed at BYU and as the editor of the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative. He was part of the original team that established the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) in 1979 to "promote and coordinate Book of Mormon research and to make the results of such research available to the general public."In 1998, FARMS was brought into BYU under the umbrella of the Maxwell Institute, and the Mormon Studies Review came with it. Review writers responded to critics’ allegations by dissecting their arguments — and motives — sometimes writing scathing and often personal attacks on those who challenged LDS origins. It was, they believed, the essence of apologetics.

He must be in one of those "nice" Mormon families you claimed to be so "familiar" with, no?

And - since you've been defending the Mormons - I can only gather you've been endorsing the "scathing and often personal attacks" they've used on critics since 1979 - but, like most Mormons, you just don't like those "pesky questions," right?

And finally - since I'm sure you're going to claim that changing their policy on making "scathing and often personal attacks" on critics proves how "nice" they are - I want to remind you there's not one word on the cult doing a damned thing for the individuals and groups whose reputations and careers the cult has destroyed for merely pointing out the obvious facts. There's also not a single word about the cult revising their BS to reflect those facts. They've just hurt people, and are now going to be "nicer" about it because so many are watching.

In other words, you are collaborating with evil.

Here's a definition of "hypocrisy," sis, in case you've missed it while talking to all those "nice" LDS members.

I've accepted any consequences. That's about all I can do. I all your " proofs" that because you use them as proofs, not because I believe them.

The examples you cite are damning to your view, not mine. Every religion has problems. I have been studying Mormon theology, and I don't see it the same way you do. That's about it. what you do about it is entirely your own business.

I've accepted any consequences. That's about all I can do. I all your " proofs" that because you use them as proofs, not because I believe them.

The examples you cite are damning to your view, not mine. Every religion has problems. I have been studying Mormon theology, and I don't see it the same way you do. That's about it. what you do about it is entirely your own business.

I don't know how religious people ever expect the world to find the peace they seek when they refuse to engage in anything even remotely resembling reality or a decent conversation. Oh, wait - yes I do:

They think they can either

A) play this heads-I win/tails-you-lose semantics game for the rest of time.